I'm a big CGC fan but agreed hoping we are doing everything possible to get these kids a GT degree if they have bought in and put in the effort. If they want to play and we told them they are not going to be playing at GT, then let them move on. If they know they aren't going to play but want a GT degree, put them on medical for the chronic hamstring issue.
That is what I was asking for clarification on in my earlier post. If the player is told that they would be cut but could transition to a non-athletic scholarship because of the coaching change and stay at Tech, then she has no legitimate beef. If, however, they player is told they would be cut and lose their scholarship, she has a right to be protective of someone she clearly has a fondness for.
That is definitely not right. The athletic scholarship is not offered “just until we find someone faster than you.”
Agreed. But You gotta have a hammy. Wouldn’t be in favor of lying about that.
Hopefully not. We’re all just speculating what’s going on.
Agreed — provided there’s a legal and ethical way to accomplish that. That’s the point of the Medicals discussion.
This is where the line gets fuzzy. I don't think it's "we found someone faster than you." I think it translates to both academic and athletic scholarships this way:
CGC should be able to use every means acceptable to the NCAA, just like his opponents would. Otherwise, you are asking him to run a program with one hand tied behind his back.
Is there a scintilla of evidence that any player has had a scholarship revoked, or even received a stern talking to about having a scholarship revoked? Or is all of this rumor, innuendo, and wholesale claptrap?
